Intelligent design theory, PROVEN

originally posted by: Raggedyman




If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Just as many of us suspected, you don't read any of the links you post yourself.

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Or why don't you just, you know...read it yourself and wow us with your mastery of every known (and several as yet unknown) discipline of science? Just another example of the melodramatic heights of your world renowned hypocrisy and C grade trolling. Is the true crux of the problem that you don't actually understand any of the science that you denounce and mock rendering a reading of the information as useful as last months edition of the Watchtower? Or is it just the big words that you stumble over?

I understand, really... Because you don't understand the material being discussed it seems esoteric, lofty and just out of reach. Hallmarks of a 3rd string religious cult. Your confusion is perfectly understandable. It's time to take the training wheels off though, sit in your big boy chair and read the info on your own and then respond to the information instead of using it as yet another opportunity to distract people away from just where on the field the ball actually is. It's not like we've been putting you out by forcing you to read a dozen papers a day for the last month.

You've said repeatedly that you don't actually read any of the links, citations or papers presented whereas we actually do read your twaddle. We don't take the disingenuous stance that it's realistic to mock something we haven't read and as a consequence, don't understand the material in question. Personally, if you're THAT confident that your position rests firmly on bedrock, I just don't know why you wouldn't want to read the opposing point of view and what they are presenting as evidence. The more you know about the opposing point of view and where they're approaching the issue from, the better you are able to tackle the specificity of the claim at hand. Plus there's always the chance you might post something that makes me look at the issue from a different perspective. But you flat out refuse to even attempt to grasp the hard science that you are confronted with. I guess it makes it easier to brush it to the side as if it really is inconsequential when you don't have the foggiest idea what is actually being discussed.

I'm always open minded enough to be surprised though so anytime you want to put in a smidgen of effort beyond a simple copy and paste job from the same handful of posts you recycle throughout the boards, I eagerly await such an effort on your part.i don't expect you to do so, but like I said, I'm always happy to be pleasantly surprised.

a reply to: peter vlar

Peter Vlar
All those words a wall addressed at me, really.

Condense it

I don't read your religios rants, I am sorry
I am just not interested in being preached at by atheists

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

What does any of that have to do with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? Nothing, of course. You're squirming your way out of addressing the issue.

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

What does any of that have to do with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? Nothing, of course. You're squirming your way out of addressing the issue.

It ha nothing to do with your request of me phantom

Just a an aside, can you tell me
Now understand the question, think about it

WHY do scientists do a paper for peer review

I might make a thread about that question , see how the average evolutionists handles the issue

AGain

WHY
WHY are peer review undertaken, why do they need them, what is their purpose

Concentrate on the word WHY, comprehend its importance and how I have asked the question leading with the WHY
See it's a WHY not a how, don't answer what I havnt asked
Be extra careful in addressing the WHY not how, how is not part of the question

Thanks


Just as an aside, I don't know your issue, just more religios text you want me to read as far as I can tell
Please read the book dianetics, I can link it?
Why you ask?
Because you want me to read your silly religious link and I am not interested, just like you are not interested in dianetics

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

What does any of that have to do with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? Nothing, of course. You're squirming your way out of addressing the issue.

It ha nothing to do with your request of me phantom

Just a an aside, can you tell me
Now understand the question, think about it

WHY do scientists do a paper for peer review

I might make a thread about that question , see how the average evolutionists handles the issue

AGain

WHY
WHY are peer review undertaken, why do they need them, what is their purpose

Concentrate on the word WHY, comprehend its importance and how I have asked the question leading with the WHY
See it's a WHY not a how, don't answer what I havnt asked
Be extra careful in addressing the WHY not how, how is not part of the question

Thanks


Just as an aside, I don't know your issue, just more religios text you want me to read as far as I can tell
Please read the book dianetics, I can link it?
Why you ask?
Because you want me to read your silly religious link and I am not interested, just like you are not interested in dianetics

Why do we need peer reviewed research? What kind of a stupid-ass question is that??? When you open a bottle of aspirin, you know it's been tested, that there's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that you're not going to get poisoned.

You don't know anything about science. Why are you even posting?

No one buys into your "religion". Science doesn't have a religion. You do. You've made it perfectly clear that you can't answer the questions, that you understand nothing about EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, and have no desire to learn what it is.

You've slimmed your way out of addressing the issue. But it didn't work. Answer the question.

a reply to: peter vlar

You forget about the it's a tooth guy? Anyway.. there was time this sight had more integrity. You post "proof" you better have it or else it got thrown in the hoax bin, especially in the UFO forums, but here the religious loons get a free pass to preach their ant- science propaganda.
Sad really.

a reply to: flyingfish

I miss itsthetooth. At least he was bringing a fun new version of the same old insanity to the table.

Raggedy just flogs the "modern evolutionary synthesis is just as much a religion as intelligent design or creationism" argument. Cdesign proponentsists can't elevate their religious beliefs, so they seek to try and pull evolution down to their level. And, as Raggedy has shown by his repeated misunderstanding of what a scientific theory is, they can't even get that right because they don't actually understand how science works as a process.

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: peter vlar

Peter Vlar
All those words a wall addressed at me, really.

How,do,you know. It's not like you read what I wrote.

Condense it

Maybe you should skip the science and go back to working with your speak n' spell

I don't read your religios rants, I am sorry

How do you know what it is if you refuse to read?

I am just not interested in being preached at by atheists.

No, you're just not interested in anything outside the bounds of your scripted narratives. Do my words contain too many syllables for you? And FYI, I'm not an Atheist. Not that you care or that you will read this far.

originally posted by: iterationzero
a reply to: flyingfish

I miss itsthetooth. At least he was bringing a fun new version of the same old insanity to the table.

Raggedy just flogs the "modern evolutionary synthesis is just as much a religion as intelligent design or creationism" argument. Cdesign proponentsists can't elevate their religious beliefs, so they seek to try and pull evolution down to their level. And, as Raggedy has shown by his repeated misunderstanding of what a scientific theory is, they can't even get that right because they don't actually understand how science works as a process.

Typically what happens is that the OP, or the opponent, disappears into the aether. Then when they think no one is looking, they show up again with the same crap. So I don't expect Raggedy to address his problem with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. He'll ignore it - like they all do - and hope that the real evidence goes away. Unfortunately for them, it doesn't go away. There's enough of us to keep them on their toes - and looking like fools.

originally posted by: flyingfish
a reply to: peter vlar
but here the religious loons get a free pass to preach their ant- science propaganda.

Your bias is showing - Refuting a theory is not science denial. In a decade or so we'll probably be looking back at this era as the scientific inquisition, where you either believed in evolution or were dispelled from the clergy. It's sad how material reductionism still plagues our society.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: cooperton

Yes I am a polytheist, and the cosmology of my ancestors (and this would be the various western Indo-European speaking peoples) does not require that "the Gods did it" to be part of how things are.

The simplest expression of how things started is that order came from Chaos, before the Gods, and then the Gods arose.

As a scientist this does not disagree with my spiritual gnosis.

So in the course of history, in which you believe that evolution ultimately spawned humans from microbes, what role did these gods play? Why are they gods? Did they evolve too? Or are they some sort of exception in your spiritual gnosis?

a reply to: cooperton

The gods fought, and died, loved, and hated, they walked among us, and yes they too evolved. That is evident in the various mythic cycles. Again no where in there is science disagreeing with any of this.

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

What does any of that have to do with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? Nothing, of course. You're squirming your way out of addressing the issue.

It ha nothing to do with your request of me phantom

Just a an aside, can you tell me
Now understand the question, think about it

WHY do scientists do a paper for peer review

I might make a thread about that question , see how the average evolutionists handles the issue

AGain

WHY
WHY are peer review undertaken, why do they need them, what is their purpose

Concentrate on the word WHY, comprehend its importance and how I have asked the question leading with the WHY
See it's a WHY not a how, don't answer what I havnt asked
Be extra careful in addressing the WHY not how, how is not part of the question

Thanks


Just as an aside, I don't know your issue, just more religios text you want me to read as far as I can tell
Please read the book dianetics, I can link it?
Why you ask?
Because you want me to read your silly religious link and I am not interested, just like you are not interested in dianetics

Why do we need peer reviewed research? What kind of a stupid-ass question is that??? When you open a bottle of aspirin, you know it's been tested, that there's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that you're not going to get poisoned.

You don't know anything about science. Why are you even posting?

No one buys into your "religion". Science doesn't have a religion. You do. You've made it perfectly clear that you can't answer the questions, that you understand nothing about EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, and have no desire to learn what it is.

You've slimmed your way out of addressing the issue. But it didn't work. Answer the question.

I had a feeling you were not going to answer that question, it does deserve a thread of its own.
I love the way the question makes the average peer review advocate squirm, run hide and tremble

"I need money for this belief I have, I will publish my belief and hope others accept it, then I will get lots of money and be able to test my belief. "

Why you would bring up Asprin when we are talking evolution is beyond understanding.
I know, it's not really.
You are substituting something mundane like Asprin to a supernatural occurrence like evolution.
A simple bate and switch

Try again Phantom, try harder, you have shown your ignorance, evolution is not Asprin

I believe your peer review is a religios text, you havnt proven I should engage a religios text in science yet.

Peter Vlar, I am having a discussion with Phantom, I don't have time for you at the moment

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Agartha

And you believe those peer reviewed articles prove evolution
It seems peer review is your bible

You don't understand context

And just to assist your memory, here's the link again:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Why isn't that EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE??? Everyone is breathless anticipating your reply.

If I read every religios link shown to me by the magic faith believer I wouldn't have a life

Why not just tell me what proof they you have that proves your religion of evolution
I am game are you

Sure. It's in that paper. Read it. It's not a religion. It's SCIENCE. It's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Show me that it isn't.
It's also only ONE paper - you don't have to read the 150,000+ papers. Get it?

It's a religion, paraphrase it for me

I can paraphrase my religious rants for you

Man sinned, sin is punished by death, Jesus came and died so you don't have to be punished

It's that easy

What does any of that have to do with EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE? Nothing, of course. You're squirming your way out of addressing the issue.

It ha nothing to do with your request of me phantom

Just a an aside, can you tell me
Now understand the question, think about it

WHY do scientists do a paper for peer review

I might make a thread about that question , see how the average evolutionists handles the issue

AGain

WHY
WHY are peer review undertaken, why do they need them, what is their purpose

Concentrate on the word WHY, comprehend its importance and how I have asked the question leading with the WHY
See it's a WHY not a how, don't answer what I havnt asked
Be extra careful in addressing the WHY not how, how is not part of the question

Thanks


Just as an aside, I don't know your issue, just more religios text you want me to read as far as I can tell
Please read the book dianetics, I can link it?
Why you ask?
Because you want me to read your silly religious link and I am not interested, just like you are not interested in dianetics

Why do we need peer reviewed research? What kind of a stupid-ass question is that??? When you open a bottle of aspirin, you know it's been tested, that there's EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that you're not going to get poisoned.

You don't know anything about science. Why are you even posting?

No one buys into your "religion". Science doesn't have a religion. You do. You've made it perfectly clear that you can't answer the questions, that you understand nothing about EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, and have no desire to learn what it is.

You've slimmed your way out of addressing the issue. But it didn't work. Answer the question.

I had a feeling you were not going to answer that question, it does deserve a thread of its own.
I love the way the question makes the average peer review advocate squirm, run hide and tremble

"I need money for this belief I have, I will publish my belief and hope others accept it, then I will get lots of money and be able to test my belief. "

Why you would bring up Asprin when we are talking evolution is beyond understanding.
I know, it's not really.
You are substituting something mundane like Asprin to a supernatural occurrence like evolution.
A simple bate and switch

Try again Phantom, try harder, you have shown your ignorance, evolution is not Asprin

I believe your peer review is a religios text, you havnt proven I should engage a religios text in science yet.

Peter Vlar, I am having a discussion with Phantom, I don't have time for you at the moment

What question didn't I answer? You asked why peer reviewed papers were necessary. I responded with an example: when you open a bottle of aspirin, you have confidence that you're not going to be poisoned. That's because salicylic acid was thoroughly tested. The EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE showed that it was a safe and effective compound. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE is acquired by rigorous research which is usually published in leading journals. So that's why PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS and publications are extremely important. Do you get it now??

originally posted by: Raggedyman



Peter Vlar, I am having a discussion with Phantom, I don't have time for you at the moment

Oh no... That sad little person who mocks things they don't even have a basic understanding of while making condescending comments to every other poster in the thread doesn't have time for me?!?!

For the record though, you're not in a discussion with phantom. You're only in a discussion with yourself. Why the hell should anyone answer any questions you pose when you refuse to read anything posted in this thread or any other you take part in for that matter? When you mask your own shortcomings in condescension because you know,you're way out of,your depth. It's people like,you who have ruined ATS by dragging it down to your subterranean level of willful ignorance and tolling. I'Il, just quit while I'm ahead because if I posted what I'm actually thinking right now I would be banned from ATS and a piss ant like you isn't worth the hassle.

originally posted by: Phantom423
. The EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE showed that it was a safe and effective compound. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE is acquired by rigorous research which is usually published in leading journals. So that's why PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS and publications are extremely important. Do you get it now??

Ahh so you cant ingest evolution and be poisoned, I get it
Evolution theory is a medication, does it dull the mind as well, obviously

I hope that they didnt put to much effort into reading a peer paper that suggested it was ok to ingest evolution like asprin

Tee Heee hee

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: Phantom423
. The EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE showed that it was a safe and effective compound. EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE is acquired by rigorous research which is usually published in leading journals. So that's why PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS and publications are extremely important. Do you get it now??

Ahh so you cant ingest evolution and be poisoned, I get it
Evolution theory is a medication, does it dull the mind as well, obviously

I hope that they didnt put to much effort into reading a peer paper that suggested it was ok to ingest evolution like asprin

Tee Heee hee

I really think it's straitjacket time for you, Raggedy. You're off the cliff.

If you want to pose your question, I'm happy to answer it. In the meantime, take a pill.

a reply to: Raggedyman

So do you miss the point on everything, or just on things you are resistant to trying to understand? Because anytime peer reviewed journals are brought up, you seem to loose any connection to reason.

Evolution, can be demonstrated via empirical evidence, and it gets published in peer reviewed journals. It is an well controlled process. I know, I've been through peer reivew on my academic (pre industry research).

Now creationism, and ID, that can't pass peer review, as it can not be empirically demonstrated.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: cooperton

The gods fought, and died, loved, and hated, they walked among us, and yes they too evolved. That is evident in the various mythic cycles. Again no where in there is science disagreeing with any of this.

Wait, so if they too evolved, they evolved beyond human? Or, in your belief, are humans and gods intermingled? What traits did these gods evolve beyond humans? Where are these races now? And lastly, how does science agree with the notion of the evolution of gods (organisms with superhuman capabilities)?